31 October, 2020

Blog

Bond Fiasco & Confronting The Auditor General

By W.A Wijewardena

Dr W.A Wijewardena

Dr W.A Wijewardena

Bond fiasco and confronting the Auditor General: Monetary Board should be more mindful of its obligations

COPE directing the Central Bank to cooperate with AG 

A recent news item has reported that the parliamentary watchdog, the Committee on Public Enterprises or COPE had summoned the Central Bank Governor and his deputies on a complaint made by the Auditor General.

The complaint has been that the Central Bank, the operational arm of the Monetary Board which owns the Bank legally, had refused to provide the information which the Auditor General had sought for in connection with Treasury bond transactions despite repeated reminders.

The news report says that COPE members had grilled the Deputy Governor as to why the information sought by the Auditor General had not been submitted. The answer had been that the data requested had been market-sensitive and their release would have threatened the smooth functioning of financial markets.

However, COPE had not been convinced of that argument and it is reported that the Central Bank management had been given an ultimatum to comply with the request.

Denting of the reputation of the Monetary Board

There is no way to verify this news item independently since the COPE proceedings, unlike the US Congressional hearings, have not been open to the media. As such, what has been reported in the media could be hearsay.

Yet, neither COPE nor the Central Bank’s Monetary Board has disputed the news item so far. Hence, citizens are to believe that the news item has correctly reported the transaction that had transpired between COPE and the Central Bank’s senior management at the meeting under reference.

If this report is correct, this is another severe dent on the reputation of the Monetary Board which has lost it in large measure due to its intransigent action or negligence in the recent past.

Board’s intransigence in the past

This writer drew the attention of the Monetary Board to the eroding reputation of the Board in a number of articles in this series in the recent past to no avail. When the first bond scam hit the market in February 2015, this writer warned the Board that its handling of the case was unprofessional and therefore it led to an erosion of its reputation.

When the Governor and the Board started to act as the owners of the Bank and not as its trustees, another article in the series reminded them of their trusteeship obligations.

Justification of Central Bank losses

When the Central Bank made a colossal loss in 2013 and despite the losses, the Monetary Board made another colossal profit transfer to the Government, this writer warned that it gave rise to questionable governance and reputation risk in another article. The Monetary Board maintained complete silence over this issue and acted as if it had not made any loss in its operations.

However, when 2014 was also marked by losses, and the Board had continued to make profit transfers to the government causing a sharp decline in its capital funds, the attention of the Board was drawn to the imminent threat to its solvency. The Board sprang into a defensive mode at first and to an offensive mode later by disputing this writer in a series of exchanges.

The Board first justified loss making by claiming that the central banks were not supposed to make profits since they had to conduct monetary policy at a cost to the nation. When this writer pointed out that the issue was not about ‘not-making profits’ but about ‘making continuous losses’, the Board took the position that even loss-making was not a problem since the government, as the owner of the central bank, could provide funds at any time to recapitalise a bankrupt central bank.

The futility of this argument was presented by this writer in a further article since the Sri Lanka Government did not have such free money to be wasted on a bankrupt central bank. This writer advised that the Monetary Board should go for a restructuring plan immediately to reverse the ominous trend.

However, 2015 was also marked by a similar loss that had eroded the Bank’s capital funds to a critically low level. Since the Board was taking losses lightly, this writer argued that it was no better than the bankrupt SriLankan Airlines which also held such a callous attitude over its losses.

The Board immediately jumped into action by issuing a statement based on its previous line of argument and going to the extent of discrediting the opinion of this writer as one coming from a ‘retired employee of the central bank’ and not from someone who had held senior positions of the Bank for more than two decades.

Then it was pointed out by this writer that the way the Board had calculated profits of the Bank was erroneous and it should not watch impassively the fast depletion of the capital base of the Bank. There was no further response from the Board but it did not mean that it would have taken the message seriously.

Acting deaf and dumb to criticism on bond scams

When the second bond scam hit the market in March 2016, the Board did not take any action to correct it. This was pointed out by this writer in two articles in this series. In the first article, it was pointed out that the Board had to act very fast in order to keep its reputation intact.

When the pressure was mounting, the Board took a step backward and issued a very brief statement implicitly admitting that the systems in place in the Central Bank were not ideal and needed improvement. This was a too late and too short course of action by the Board. This writer in a further article reminded the Board that it had lost a valuable opportunity by its non-action when the irregularities in the bond market were brought to its notice in the past.

Refusing information to Auditor General

When civil society activists demanded the details of the bond transactions in the recent past, the Board refused to oblige, taking cover behind a section in the Monetary Law Act which was not relevant to the Board but only the employees and workers of the Central Bank. Now it has gone a step further and refused to give information even to the constitutionally established watchdog of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, namely, the Auditor General.

AG should be viewed as Board’s ‘Third Eye’ and not as an enemy

In terms of section 42(1) of the Monetary Law Act or MLA under which the Monetary Board gets its powers, it is the Auditor General who should audit the accounts of the Central Bank.

In order to carry out his functions, the Auditor General is empowered by section 43(1) of MLA as follows: “The Auditor General and any officer of his department authorised by him in that behalf shall at all times have the right of access to, and examination of, the accounts of the Central Bank and all books and documents containing information with respect to matters connected with such accounts.”

This provision has been further strengthened and codified by section 154(5)(a) of the Constitution. This section further empowers the Auditor General to call for information and explanations from entities that are being audited by him for performing his duties as the auditor. The Monetary Board should consider the Auditor General as its ‘third eye’ watching over the matters that are not visible to it and not as an enemy. Hence, it does a disservice to it by refusing to release information called for by the Auditor General. In other words, it is effectively blinding its third eye so that it cannot see what is happening in the Bank under its own nose.

Governor Karunatilake’s confrontational course with AG

But this was not the first time the Central Bank’s Monetary Board had been confrontational with the Auditor General. During 1989-92 when Dr H.N.S. Karunatilake was the Governor and Chairman of the Monetary Board, there was such a confrontation with the Auditor General that it finally went up to the level of COPE.

The Board continued to deny the information sought by the Auditor General on the same grounds as it does today. That is, by maintaining that releasing sensitive information to the Auditor General would lead to financial sector instability.

However, the Board’s continued intransigence was an embarrassment to the Government which had been seeking foreign investments into the country in large volumes to rebuild the economy which had fallen to a slow growth mode following the insurgency during 1988-89. When it became clear that peace could not be made between the two confronting parties, the government decided not to reappoint Governor Karunatilake in 1992 on expiry of his existing term.

Peace move by Governor Disanayaka

Then, it was left to the new Governor, Mr. H.B. Disanayaka, to initiate action on behalf of the Monetary Board to make peace with the Auditor General, reaffirm the Board’s commitment to cooperate with COPE and reformulate the Bank’s accounting system in terms of the global best practices.

This writer, who was a member of the Central Bank team that appeared before COPE, still recalls the tense situation that prevailed at the COPE meeting. There were hostile brickbats thrown at first, but when Governor Disanayaka made his solemn promise, the tense atmosphere began to cool off paving way for an amicable settlement.

The Bank agreed to release the data and information to the Auditor General promptly so that the latter could report back to COPE on matters pertaining to the operations of the Central Bank. By acting in that wise manner, the Board saved the government of possible embarrassment.

Another dispute with AG in early 2000s

A similar dispute arose between the Monetary Board and the Auditor General during the latter part of the second term of the Governor A.S. Jayawardena and the early part of the term of the Governor Sunil Mendis.

The dispute arose with respect to the issue of converting the Central Bank’s accounting system to International Accounting Standards and audit system to International Auditing Standards.

The Board had earlier decided under the modernisation program it had introduced to the Bank that its accounting and auditing templates should be based on international standards. Hence, it was necessary to engage the services of international auditors to conduct the new audit of the Bank.

But under MLA, it was the Auditor General who had to audit the accounts of the Bank and report to Parliament through the Minister of Finance. But the Auditor General did his audits in terms of Sri Lanka Accounting Standards and, for that purpose, accounts had to be prepared in terms of those standards. Thus, it was a dispute which had to be sorted out early.

Respecting and recognising mutual interests

On instructions from Governor A.S. Jayawardena, a Central Bank team was led by this writer to make representations to the Auditor General Sarath Mayadunne. Though the discussion was cordial, there was no way for the two parties to reach a compromising middle ground without respecting each other’s positions.

Mayadunne held that he had a right to audit the accounts of the Bank in terms of Sri Lanka Accounting Standards, the decision to engage international auditors was a matter for him, his interest to audit the accounts of the Bank was in terms of the audit principle enshrined by ‘value for money’ and if his capacity was limited in that respect, he could hire experts to help him.

The view expressed by the Central Bank team was that the Bank needed to modernise itself, and modernisation demanded it to adopt global best practices which should be acceptable to the global investor community as well.

Hence, it was pointed out that Auditor General’s standing in the way of the Bank’s modernisation was detrimental to its future operations.

The two parties had to recognise the interests of each other in order to reach a workable solution. This was exactly what the Central Bank team and the Auditor General did at that time. What was necessary was to recognise the mutual interests of each other. Monetary Board recognised the professional interests as well as the constitutional obligations of the Auditor General. The latter recognised the need for modernising the Central Bank. In that way, a compromising middle ground was reached and that arrangement is still in operation.

Lessons for the Monetary Board from neighbouring India

The Monetary Board should be mindful of the global developments of good governance in which all public authorities are subject to public review today in order to prevent them from being captured by interested parties. This menace known as ‘regulatory capture’ is the worst public enemy possible.

The Indian Supreme Court in a recent public interest litigation directed the Reserve Bank of India to disclose the large loan defaulters of banks when RBI took the position that it was sensitive information.

Later, RBI is reported to have submitted the required information to the Supreme Court in a sealed envelope with a request to keep such information confidential. This is an eye-opener for Sri Lanka’s Monetary Board which continues to deny providing the information sought by Auditor General embarrassing itself as well as the government.

Confronting AG in a good governance society is not in Board’s interests

Hence, by refusing to release information relating to bond transactions to Auditor General, the Monetary Board is embarrassing not only itself but also the Minister of Finance, the Prime Minister and the President who are committed to establishing a good governance society that guarantees the freedom of citizens to have access to information.

It should not try to dent its reputation by being intransigent and adamant. Civil society is watching the behaviour of the Board and that society is most powerful today. Hence, the Board should have been more mindful when it chose a confrontational course with the Auditor General in the first instance.

*W A Wijewardena, a former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, can be reached at waw1949@gmail.com

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 1
    0

    Thanks for this WIje. All this market sensitive data stories as and excuse to hide and delete information is HOG WASH for the moda masses! The reputation of the Sri Lanka CB cannot get worse! Investigation of the corruption there will only improve the reputation of CB.

    Arjuna Mahendran has been hiding behind 2 excuses to not resign – was a cad the man is in comparison the the Wildlife head – Pilapitiaya who resigned amidst protests by civil society that he should continue.
    CIvil society should now go on the streets and ask for both Mahendran and Nivard Cabraal to be investigated and arrested and passport impounded.

    1. He is Tamil and being targeted because he is a minority. Fact is Mahendran is an INSULT TO HONEST TAMILS and PROFESSIONALS.

    2. That his bond scam information is market sensitive. But is not all the rumour about insider trading due to suppression of information at CB much more damaging to the bank and national economy. This is the excuse that Ranil WIckramasinghe has used to also not investigate Ajith Nivard Cabraal who was also insider trading and doing foreign currency speculation at CB. Both must be PROSECUTED and JAILED for their financial crimes and the Central Bank cleaned up.

    The repuration of the Central Bank is finished and failure to investigate and clean it up will cause more market damage and kill the national economy of Sri Lanka.

    • 1
      0

      Bond issues have been manipulated for decades and nothing new. Interestingly some bond dealers have survived with governors from both sides and hence smart.

      AG does not audit some of the large financial institutions including CBSL. It is sub contracted to a private firm who has the skill sets and interesting to see as to what would be reported by the firm this year. It is the same with BoC and PB.

      It is very clear that bond issues and interest rates have been manipulated and the good thing is in SL and we don’t hold public officials accountable!!!

      It is possible that in 2015/16 some bond dealers could have made billions of rupees in profits due to privileged info.

      Monetary Board is toothless and will not take any action.

  • 1
    0

    Seems like the Monetary Board Trustees are also corrupt and need to be changed. The entire rotten financial system needs change and those responsible for embezzling EPF and ETF funds should be charged and their assets ceased if guilty.

    Arjuna Mahendran’s. Perpetual Trasuries, Aloysiau and and Nivard Cabraal’s assets should be frozen while the inquiry into the bond scams and currency manipulation are on going.

  • 1
    0

    Dr. Wijewardena, you should be the head of the Monetary Board!

    Thanks for your hard work and courage to hold the corrupt crooks in the Sri Lankan financial system and their political bosses accountable.

  • 2
    0

    Wijewardena,

    Thank you for your efforts. You provide today a good summary and history.

    Let us hope that the IMF and others whose money is desperately needed put pressure on our leaders to clean up Central Bank.

  • 2
    0

    I have been a keen reader of your well researched and very informative educational articles, and wish to show my admiration for your continued contribution by a honest, dedicated and credible gentleman. I know that politics never creeps into your writings, mainly wholesomely of public interest. Very well done.

  • 4
    0

    Some time back Srilankan Air said that they are not subject to Govt Audit and cannot be summoned by COPE. Now its the Central Bank. As long as public funds are involved all Govt. undertakings should be subject to Govt. Audit. They are answerable to the people.

  • 2
    0

    Thank you Dr. Wijewardene. You are indeed educating us all.
    For the sake of the country, please keep writting & keep up the pressure on the authorities.

    Where is the friday forum? Run out of steam?
    Mr. Chandra jayaratne has got cheesed off with the President?

  • 0
    3

    Mr. WAW,

    You, and all those who talk about bond matters and CB Governor, are drawing a straight line, a demarcation and invoking a set of rules and then want CBG and RW’s government to function within those boundaries. And that is pretty much the standard accepted democratic process with which the machinations of the government are supposed to function.

    But I have certain caveats on that view. There are certain sensitive information that cannot be divulged to every kolla and balla in the country. The Auditor General is only a cog in the wheel and he cannot assume the proportions of the whole wheel or the entire machine. Neither, AG, COPE, Handunneththi, Dew Gunasekara, the Ekabadda Vipakshaya (Rajapaksha clan) or good governance advocates and activists will answer or be responsible to the people of the country who have given a mandate to this government to solve their economic, social, welfare etc. problems. It is the top leadership i.e. RW on whose shoulder this burden rests. It is he who will have to go before the people and face their verdict. So he adopts certain strategies to achieve those objectives on behalf of the people. The democratic institutions along with their rules are just guidelines and general mechanisms of operations of governance. There may be various people and processes that do not comply with or cannot be contained within those democratic ways. For example USA has legally allowed the existence and functioning of “Shell Companies” which are immune to normal laws on the land. Even the government cannot demand the information of those accounts. By this way the USA has benefitted from the “Black Money” circulating in the world. May be MR too may have invested in those accounts the stolen assets of this country. But ultimately it is the benefit to the country and its people and not the law that matters.

    Singapore, though a small country, is a financial hub where enormous volumes of money and big time business people frequent. Arjun Mahendran is a person who has worked in a firm that deals in big business there and gained valuable experience, exposure and business contacts far and wide through and out of the region. Then Singapore government on the merits of his qualifications and capacity obtained his service for that country but on the condition that he obtains Singaporean residency which AM obliged considering the fact that his own country failed to obtain his services. Here we have to consider the benefits, social status, level and status of his life, living and luxury in par with his Singaporean position and living standards. Then when RW took over government he was invited to join with him to be part of his strategic team and plan to which AM obliged. His advent has to be viewed not purely as an employment in the Government of SL because he has in fact moved away or renounced a highly beneficial and lucrative career in Singapore to a bankrupt country with all sorts of problems, chaos, lack of law and order, nonfunctioning of every form of imaginable machinations of a normally running country. But he anyway accepted RW’s invitation and came here to do some service for his own country.

    Now these people like Handunnetti, Dew Gunesekera, Bandula Gunawardena, Wimal Weerawansa and innumerable others who have an axe to grind with the government of RW are barking at AM like a pack of dogs chasing after a midnight thief! And I ask: why him, why now, why target him? Haven’t they got any other issues requiring more attention-there are countless other issues in the country that need focus! Bandula Gunawardena more than anyone else knows what AM is capable of because BG has worked with him. The one and only wish of JVPers, MR clan and majority of media rag owners is the sinking of this government-the more the problems, natural and manmade disasters, system upsets, strikes the better! MR and JVP both want to fish in the troubled water! They see that RW is marshaling his men and resources, friendly foreign countries and business and investment entities along his chosen path to development and prosperity. He uses AM to mobilize resources known to AM to ease the burden on the country and to start new ventures. These efforts are now in the formative stage. The JVP et al sensing it are trying to shoot down the war horse AM and prevent RW‘s march. That is why they come up with game baiyala typed jokes like the number of foreign trips AM has taken, the price of his suite, his credit card limit and expenditure etc. Do they mean AM too must sit on a wooden plank at Siripala’s tea shop eating a pan kalla with red onion gediya and then lick the palm with sugar drinking a plain-tea and then get up wiping the palm on the buttock and then proceed to the next kasippu spot? This is the attitude and behavior in effect JVP is expecting from a CBG! And what is their alternative for CBG anyway? We all saw the former AG’s fiasco when he ran for the election from JVP ticket! Poor chap! He had his entire hard earned good reputation dented and belittled by sleeping with opportunistic and conspirational JVP.

    This conspiracy against AM was first staged with backing from behind by the clown Dew Gunasekera who being a COPE member went all over the place giving voice cuts to media rags about a fabricated bond scam. The term “fabricated bond scam” is used because they filed a court case on this matter and the court rejected it saying there was no corruption involved. Once the court discarded the case, instead of honoring the court’s decision this pack of JVPers and MR happy thieves began an unending uproar against AM which is what is surfacing and subduing from time to time now. They have made it such a ridiculous issue that even the three-wheelers are talking about “bond scam” now! The role of COPE chairman Handunnetti is extremely questionable. RW made his appointment possible acting in par with his larger than life global outlook-had MR was in power the very COPE would be a nonentity. Assuming chairmanship Handunnetti seems to have assumed that COPE is their propaganda center in parliament! What this silly bugger should have done was to carry out an inquiry into the so called bond scam if they think that an anomaly or a theft has been committed at all and then table the findings in parliament after due consultations with RW. But these monkeys never undertake the actions required of them but simply create big media hype. It is totally reasonable, under this questionable behavior of the part of the COPE, for the CBG to refuse co-operation with the AG because this claimed sensitive information would very well end up in daily gossip rags with salts and spice added resulting in total loss of faith in the system on the part of international players. The foolish AG too seems to be a total clown in connivance with the JVP because instead of communicating with the next level in hierarchy he through his JVP horanawa made headlines in Rajapaksharized media rags. It seems time to remove Handunnetti, the razor totting monkey, from COPE chairmanship and appoint a decent person qualified to hold this responsible position. In the same way they launched a huge media mudslinging campaign against RW those days they are now engaged in the same campaign against CBG because they cannot now falsely accuse and attack RW and hence they attack the one who was appointed by RW hoping that AM will finally desert his post being unable to bear their barrage of false accusations and character assassination. But I don’t think AM is that naïve to be intimidated or discouraged by silly [Edited out] like JVPers or the civil activist morons and he will definitely go on hand in hand with RW. Even the president now seems convinced about the real facts behind this issue.

  • 0
    1

    The writer talks about the losses made by the CBSL. However, he did not mention why CBSL making losses. If we look at the annual report the bank made losses of Rs.32.3Bn for the year 2014 and Rs.24.2Bn for 2013. The losses made by the bank is due to Foreign Exchange Revaluation Loss Rs.32.3Bn for 2014 and 26.8Bn for 2013. The route cause of Foreign Exchange Revaluation Loss due to depreciating Rupee (LKR) against USD.

    Why Rupee is depreciating? Is it due to Bankrupt Politicians Policies or Central Bank Operations? Government policies are not adequately increasing export revenue while our imports are increasing. And also our borrowings for bigger development projects are in Foreign Currency.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.